IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spring] IPv6 Addresses and SIDs

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Mon, 14 October 2019 14:34 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48682120170 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:34:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KJzkOWswTyQT for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x735.google.com (mail-qk1-x735.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::735]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92AAC12002F for <spring@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x735.google.com with SMTP id z67so16035538qkb.12 for <spring@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=891PuDS1hfKb9oiR4NuENmP2tmzZ+cCn43j4tVE4dAg=; b=FBa80rKCZEPoZxvFphsJs6iN+FmWZpWcCJ1HIFQc7Beeh8DRTEAT+1vQfora0RfX4v xizGBDusjKaByRS5OFXhKwcl0fNCn02VKjIzyPKfeNhzaIk8CxoFLs0Mggc+1G8+5USr G/dzUmdPxg42VXYlifGWJgS1PlOXkhoF8R5YKuNdhwrz3r3Y5fL6hHHesEWyiK0sC78z LQxKNkG9votFHvjaaymvSJakhnQC5jFgPq3ACTEjrio/AMY5iZGeCCn578VgGbGfrVl5 GaxSTIkgUP8phzRUER0nuFkhKyAj27yGx/Dy+CjSnz3AL/y/MtUQyJUf72xmYnvEN5gL GUiA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=891PuDS1hfKb9oiR4NuENmP2tmzZ+cCn43j4tVE4dAg=; b=PZVj6XtKx7AcdKxMcQtfpleiHCZB7WdcFMXjLoeDkuS2k023L9uJuEFy8UO/Rlq3BY nshQOOPhaIR1Q7HuExe3gNegU/68x2Y7DiKzQzAgbI1HVdSTObriV9h5eQ2Uop6hYt2Q 5gEgPUe5WZch3iWjvLUHBtDnZ10Q79a0/bObKcEYih6AVC/Vlol2Av1qI/HavFAK1SM4 NRI9oPLF+cPqNF1zp53uNZtj5EuORQLB7II/2PBamKphxjSNEzvouekNAblxRmNwvTWh HG4GLYiagK8ClzZEHKYOYadjt64MNHioSFYVczZXZ4YAOpDYyFLj2rcWIdDB35MH8Oeu MJ/w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVcPWojnxU9FT1Bb47yi1zGt0Hn1Rrgs3t82Nx6f/k0QQeSbPuP /rPf7WWk5DrDTfzkEaQrB6tS1hZteeOhLetkT754Sg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwJyZ26GOvw+2jUe4W2YNMBkwJdyV2p7fK1c8QRaA7VfEjOoY6osGgZVGOwHdZk3cHrSwn5wtFqr/AWPWlUzEg=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:c87:: with SMTP id 129mr29232718qkm.465.1571063669551; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 07:34:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <SN6PR05MB5710CBAF8E6DF307401A2166AE9D0@SN6PR05MB5710.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <f5eb739b-9ae4-433e-e6c0-8bcdb7bc575e@si6networks.com> <BYAPR05MB5703169601886283700608A5AE9F0@BYAPR05MB5703.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <B6FE2A8B-B23B-4E9C-BB33-F6A5BD78C52B@gmail.com> <BN7PR05MB5699E5EA714CC64456771712AE940@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <1076F074-EB35-4D38-9949-4A241C946E07@gmail.com> <1fce4e24590847348894d10ca8bd5816@nokia-sbell.com> <D3FE1CA3-A8D1-4392-8EEC-CDCC7FC0827F@gmail.com> <BN7PR05MB56993D1127A8CA9CCC0E4A9AAE970@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <213BB95D-0E06-4E9A-B552-2A2466DC42AF@gmail.com> <04711680-e9c4-1159-58af-609517ee8bdf@joelhalpern.com> <CABNhwV3SyZNY6GrJF+wpgTmpM6DSts4gXQgdFTEgWfN876u5WQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV1Ym_AG7svmPUpmjGz600QyGRvtY5xNP0_K-hoGewUGTA@mail.gmail.com> <424b13a9a9bf4802b57c0609c92baad2@nokia-sbell.com> <BN7PR05MB569958ADB8E7BFF6C7EBC56AAE910@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMHcTyCyO5Z3KyP5otW1Xgq7un2ypEGtjjWpr00j2t9dGw@mail.gmail.com> <BN7PR05MB5699B5C42BDBD5BF244CB4A8AE910@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MME70PYa7mkTRPKHqhg_1cMAvHLU0qZJx-=CjVy-ZKXpAA@mail.gmail.com> <BN7PR05MB56999C4E2F2D8E045D47E3C1AE900@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <5ae3ab05035f439db46fe5126b1476db@nokia-sbell.com> <CABNhwV1DFaGdCjyKOCXVdMjZQK1R=diq4GeZqrR-_BMFHjcdvQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV35zdBzLjLHa6rL7Zr4V3=24x4is72DbzL6V0EG-WgUSg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABNhwV35zdBzLjLHa6rL7Zr4V3=24x4is72DbzL6V0EG-WgUSg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 16:34:18 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMFvA7sO1-1jSTRZQDNteH3UsaL0436b590hB54M6T1Unw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Cc: "Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)" <weibin.wang@nokia-sbell.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f194550594dfc37f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/EyannX2FRfpeX49c9Cz7sjfsAUE>
Subject: Re: [spring] IPv6 Addresses and SIDs
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 14:34:32 -0000

Gyan,

 [Gyan]  Spring WG  -??  Because SRv6 uses the same IPv6 data plan as
>>> "Business as Usual" NORMAL IPv6 traffic use case of the "internet"  so
>>> the an "SRv6 enabled router" that has the code that supports SRv6 has the
>>> software feature to perform the PSP & USP but lets say the packet hits a
>>> node that does not support SRv6 then the PSP & USP won't occur and all the
>>> EH headers inserted for SRv6 routing header type 4 will remain in the
>>> packet to the end destination.   How do we deal with this issue.
>>>
>>

It's not an issue so we do not need to "deal with it".

SRv6 architecture operates just fine over non upgraded (read non SR aware)
IPv6 nodes.

r.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email